[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221102101719.6cbcca6b@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:17:19 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: Leonid Ravich <leonid.ravich@...anetworks.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yigal Korman <yigal.korman@...anetworks.com>,
"linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Leon Ravich <lravich@...il.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: ib_mad ftrace event unsupported migration
On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:04:44 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca> wrote:
> So this tracepoint is just wrong, you can't call a sleepable function
> from a tracepoint like that?
>
> Presumably lockdep would/should warn about this?
Why didn't it trigger a "scheduling while atomic" bug? That should
happen if you call a sleeping function while preemption is disabled. Or
does this function explicitly enable preemption? Which nothing checks
if you enable preemption while recording to the ring buffer. I guess we
could add that check, but this is not something that commonly happens
enough to bother.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists